hard disk and/or flash recorders

M

matthewd5

Veteran
hello.

i'm thinking about getting a hard disk and/or compact flash recorder.

the first question i have is are there any models that allow you to feed the xlr signal to the recorder and still feed it onto the camera?

i've looked at the sound devices model and the tascam hd-p2.

i like the sound devices because i'm already a huge fan of my sound devices 302 mixer. i just used it on a short where i was the sound recordist and with that and my oktava mk 012 mic i captured wonderful sound.

it would have been nice to have a backup of the sound but i'm trying to find a way to do that while still sending the sound onto the dvx.

matthew
 
I routinely run my mic into my Sound Devices 722 and then out on the line outs to the camera. Works like a charm. It's not a *true* backup because if something drastic were to happen to the 722, I would imagine it might stop passing signal to the line outs. I'm not particularly worried about that.

If you already have a 302, just send the tape out to the 722 and the line outs to the camera. You should be fine with that. Sure the tape out of the 302 is unbalanced, but it really shouldn't pose a problem if the 302 and the 722 are next to each other in a bag.
 
I have the FR2 and I'm selling it. Very nice unit, but the sound devices unit is awesome. If money isn't an issue, I used the 4 input unit and it was great. It's also so effin small. I'd love to have kept it, but it was a rental for a week. The FR2 will do the same with the audio and i t's cheap.
 
so you have used the tape out's and the quality is really just as good as if you had run the xlr right into the camera?

do you use super quality/shielded cables for the connection?

matthew
 
The Nagra Ares-BB+ can run 2 channel XLR in (mic/mic att/line levels), and 2 channel balanced XLR line out, so its totally easy to do what you're talking about. You can even attenuate the outputs so you can match the pro line level on the area to the consumer line level on most cameras. Pretty cool.

I love it, it kicks some major major ass and weighs nothing.
but the SD units are also totally top notch, its kinda hard to fault a sound devices piece of gear.
 
The 744t allows you to pass the signal through and combined the 4 tracks into 2 to feed your camera. This allows you to keep the tracks separate on your recorder but still feed all the channels to your camera. Also you can set the 744t to timer record so if you are jamming your TC from the camera and it is in record run, the 744t will automatically record whenever the camera is rolling. If you are recording to both camera and recorder this feature is a must once you have used it (syncing in post is a VERY simple process).

I have been very interested in playing with the new Tascam. The features vs price is quite impressive. They definately thought thru who they were marketing too. Be aware that it has no internal TC so you need an external TC generator to feed it. If someone has used this recorder and wants to chime in with their thoughts/review that would be great.

Cheers
 
go with tascam if you are on the budget
there is no benefit buying 722 for its hard drive if you already have mixer in front and dont going to use its preamps .
the tascam cant generate tc , but for 1700 inc 3 cf cards its a real bargain , if you are buying later tc slate/ ext tc generator you will be able synchronize all the components in your system in free run tc recording
of course if you are going to work with camera which supplies tc out you wouldn't need even that .
 
Wabbit,

I received my Tascam a couple of weeks ago, and so far I'm very impressed (my upgrade was from the Marantz PMD-670). Echoing Exile, you do need an external TC generator (I also picked up a Denecke TC slate) and I can jam the recorder from the slate and it works like a charm.

While I'm still figuring things out on it, generally it seems to work very well. Does a full range of recording quality, can adjust the frame rate appropriately, and can even record with pull-up and pull-down applied.

The quality of the recordings is very good. I've fed my Senn 416 as well as my full complement of wireless into it (line-in through my mixer as well as mic in) and it sounds clean and clear, with no added noise (such as I found in my 670 when using its pre-amps.)

A few interesting notes: First, it creates BWF files, but names them .wav. I'm not sure if this is the norm (i.e. the way the SD recorders do it), but it seems a bit wierd to me. Also, it will insert the TC into the user bits on the BWF, but nothing else. I'm going to do some tests this weekend with Courtney's BWF Widget Pro to see if can just start applying my sound log directly to the files then print out a report through her tool rather than handwriting my report (i.e. attach my notebook computer via firewire to the recorder and input my notes directly into the file at the end of the take.)

Another interesting tidbit I found out about on this recorder is that it opens and closes the file it is recording every 10 seconds or so, to ensure that it has been written out to the "disk" completely and safely, so if something happens in the middle of a take, you will still get most of your take cleanly. I think that is a good thing.

There is a current problem with the pre-record buffer and TC. On a new chip, it doesn't know how to handle the pre-record and it locks up. Easy fix for now, don't use the pre-record if you're using TC. They have already issued a couple of firmware updates, so they seem to be committed to providing a high level of support for this recorder.

Last thing, I got mine for US$899 from Cascade Media (Frank there was great). (That did not include any chips, but I already had 2 1GB chips...) Oh yeah, it also has a chip test mode so you can make sure your chip is fully compatible. It also has a space remaining gauge on the display, which can be quite useful.

Overall, I'm impressed. I'm working to put together some audio samples I can post. I will post a link here when I'm done.

Phil
 
Yes the 722 (like the 744) has balanced line outs that attenuated and a separate 1/8" tape out that can't be attenuated. You can send pretty much whatever you want out of these outputs. The thing to keep in mind is that I'm pretty sure they are post A/D/A.

The quality on the camera sounded fine to me when I did this. I would say it probably sounded better than mics directly into the camera because I got to use the snazzy 722 preamps. For connectors I just used Sound Devices Ta3f - XLR adapters to some XLR cables to the camera.

I do agree with Exile - don't get the 722 if you have a nice mixer. I got it because I wanted an all in one unit and I didn't have a mixer. Either step up to the 744 for the timecode/extra tracks, or get something like the Tascam and save some cash. That's not to say I'm knocking the 722 - it's one of the nicest pieces of equipment I've owned.

About BWF - BWF files can have either .wav or .bwf extensions. On the 722/744, you can select WAV or BWF and the ONLY difference it makes is the file extension. Both types have all the metadata.
 
hello.

so i'm pretty much sold on the tascam hd-p2

i'm still unclear abut the timecode.

i'm not ready to spend $1,300 on a fancy timecode slate...

what are my other options for feeding it timecode? like what is there in the $200 price range?

also, does the hvx-200 feed timecode?

is this recorder totally useless without something feeding it timecode?

matthew
 
Hi Matthew,

Denecke sells the SB2(A) timecode generator for about $380 at B&H (probably find it lower at other sites). This is the same TC generator they built into the TS-2 slate. BTW, I got my slate for $700 from Trew (including a nice Pelican case). They come up on eBay for around $500-600, and Denecke will check it out for you for about $50 or so (more if it needs work). But, come to think of it, if you're not going to use the slate, and you're not using a camera that can generate TC, why worry about TC at all? You won't have anything to match to. You still get running time on the recorder, and you can create a sound log that includes the file name, total time, scene, take and any notes you have. I created a log I used with my PMD-670, and I'll probably just make minor adjustments to it for the Tascam.

I'm not sure if the HVX will generate TC.

HTH,

Phil
 
I have the Edirol R4 . It cost $1300 and wil record from 1 to 4 tracks simultaneously. It does not have timecde, but will record a BWF file which contains its own version of timecode right down to a individual sample. there is a bwf to Final cut converter out there . It also stores files on CF. If the BWF ? Final Cut converter works it will be incredible.
 
so if i don't need the timecode at this point is there no other use for it?

i mean the recorded file won't "drift" or anything will it?

the timecode for audio question never came up until i looked at standalone audio recorders and they all talked about taking timecode in or some having the timecode module as an option.

i'm just looking to record the audio onto a compact flash in addition to the sound i'm sending to the camera.

i'll have the scene and take numbers said into the mic and if i use the sound track from the compact flash i can sync it up.

mostly i'm just playing around with the standalone sound capture.

the tascam is under $1,000 so its not a big deal.

if i really get into it i'll probably wind up with the 744t from sound devices.

the tascam seems like a great piece of equipment to learn on.

matthew
 
Matthew,

What I have found to date with the PMD670 and the Tascam (one project so far) is that there is little or no drift problem, even with really long takes (I had one scene that was about 15 minutes in one take (the director wanted a master)...I thought the boom op's arms would fall off, but we had no drift). Just to be safe, on long takes, tail slate, that way if there is drift, you can calculate it and adjust accordingly.

You should be able to get the Tascam for around $900.

There was a rumor floating around at DV Expo that Edirol is coming out with a timecode version of the R4 in mid-2006. No idea whether this is true or not, but if they do, they will have a fairly direct competitor to the SD 744.

Frank at Cascade Media took care of me when I bought my Tascam...check them out.

Phil
 
thanks for helping me understand the timecode and how much i don't particularly need it for the gear i'm using right now!

i love the slate with the timecode display and i'm sure i'll buy one one of these days.

the tascam will be a great toy to play with and should make a great combo with my sound devices 302.

i love the 744t but can't really justify it until i've gotten either an hvx-200 or other high def camera.

my audio gear now is making me pretty happy. the oktava mk012 sounds amazing through the sd 302!

matthew
 
Thanks for the report Phil. My dealer is going to let me demo the Tascom for a movie this March. I will do a side by side with the 744t.

A question from reading the manual: is this like the foxtex where you need to be in record mode to monitor the input? If so, I don't get why they do this, very clumsy.

For bargin field recorders, Tascom might be the definitive leader by a mile here. I look forward to field testing it. Hopefully Jay Rose gets the chance to do some bench tests for DV mag sometime soon. One thing I already don't like though (Edirol, Marantz, and Fostex all have this too) is the controls on top; makes it very inconvenient for over the shoulder work.

SafariJoe: On paper the Tascom looks better then the Foxtex (to me) but it has not been tested (none of these guys publish meaningful specs)

Cheers
 
Hi Wabbit! I can't wait to hear about your side-by-side comparison. To monitor, you do have to be in record mode. I've never had much of a problem with this, I just hit pause and monitor (the Marantz is the same).

Yes, many of the controls (including the menu controls) are on the top. I don't do much bag work, so for me this is not a problem, but I can see how it would be for those that do.

As far as I can tell at this point, this unit from a price/performance standpoint is a major step up from the Marantz recorders and the FR2, but still below the 744. I would even argue, again from a price/performance standpoint, that the Tascam beats the 722.

Another thing I don't like so far about the Tascam is the way the CF goes in. There is no protective cover, and the eject button sticks way out. I may break off the eject button (the CF chip itself sits out enough that you can easily just pull it out.) For bag work, this is probably unacceptable. But, break off the eject button and throw a piece of gaffer tape on, and you're good to go. For sit and mix, this is much less of a problem.

Phil
 
matthew, i had this same question when I bought my first recorder... Timecode isnt really neccesary... they use it more for fast syncing with film to the best of my knowledge. A slate does the same thing, it just makes the editor work for his money :)
 
Ok Guys, so here is what I was going to do. I was going to buy the FR-2 with Time code and a 6GB card. I do all kinds of recording from over the shoulder, to events where I can set on a table top. But from what I have been reading it looks like allot of you are going toward the Tascam. I looked at it and it looks like a good recorder. Now money is really not to big issue. But I will say that the 744t would be an awesome tool but for $4,000 and what it offers, it’s a bit steep. And I only need two tracks, anytime I do something bigger I use my pro tools rig. K so let me say that time code is very important to me. And yes most of the time we can take it off the camera. I do not have a Time code slate yet, just a standard clapper board. So do I buy the Tascam and just buy a generator from B&H and keep that in my bag? For right now until I get a slate??? And PTALSKY how did you get a slate at trew for $700? I looked on there site and the one they have listed is $1300. So I need some help guys FR-2 with built in time code; or Tascam with TC generator or slate? I like the Tascam but need some help and you guys don't seem to hot on the FR-2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top